Re: Updating Ubuntu package info

On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 9:07 AM, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 09:06, Guillaume Lelarge <guillaume(at)lelarge(dot)info> wrote:
>> Le 04/02/2010 04:23, Greg Smith a écrit :
>>> Problem #3:  Given the general popularity of Ubuntu and what I'm seeing
>>> in the version history here, I think it would also be appropriate to
>>> warn that versions of pgAdmin3 before the upcoming 1.12 do not support
>>> connecting to PostgreSQL 9.0 databases (the '"column "datconfig" does
>>> not exist' issue) on this page too.
>>
>> We can do that. That's not something we usually do, this kind of issue
>> happens for every release of PostgreSQL and pgAdmin. You need the latest
>> major pgAdmin release to work with the latest major PostgreSQL release.
>> Moreover, since 1.10, they even have a message box telling the user than
>> PostgreSQL releases after 8.4 could be incompatible with their pgAdmin
>> release. 1.12 will have the same for post-9.0 releases.
>
> I think this one may be big enough to consider backpatching just this one check.
>
> Not for Ubuntu, but for users in general :-) IIRC it's the first time
> we die so completely and early - previously at least some things would
> work fine :)
>
> However, do we know if Ubuntu even picks up the minor releases?

We don't produce minor releases of old versions so backpatching seems
a little pointless.

>>> I think somebody (and I'm
>>> getting that feeling it's going to be me) should figure out how to build
>>> a backport of the pgadmin HEAD that goes at least a couple of versions
>>> back to help out with this.  I personally really need a PG9.0 compatible
>>> Jaunty build for example.
>>>
>>
>> I can tell you that this "someone" is not me. I don't have the time to
>> work on this.
>
> Yeah. Having a "pgadmin-daily" PPA for Ubuntu would certainly be
> pretty neat, but so far nobody has volunteered the time...

The one thing we don't want is a vendor patched version of pgAdmin
getting out there. Older versions of Ubuntu (and to a lesser extent
Debian) caused us extreme amounts of pain due to vendor patches in wx
that basically broke it. I don't want them doing the same with our
code, no matter how simple the patch may seem

I don't object to a snapshot build if someone wants to do that though.

--
Dave Page
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com